INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR INNOVATIVE RESEARCH IN MULTIDISCIPLINARY FIELD ISSN – 2455-0620 Volume - 3, Issue - 8, Aug - 2017 DIALECTICS OF ECONOMICAL BASE AND SOCIO-CULTURAL SUPERSTRUCTURE: A MARXIST PERSPECTIVE Prasanta Banerjee PhD Research Scholar, Department of Philosophy and Comparative Religion, Visva- Bharati University, Santiniketan, West Bengal, India Email - [email protected] Abstract: In Marxist theory, social structure consists of two parts - Base and Superstructure. This base and superstructure designate the social relations of a historically determined society as a whole in which material relations represent the real base or the foundation of society where as political, religious, philosophical and ideological relations etc. represent the superstructure, which rise upon the given base and are determined by the base. The historically determined base in turns determines the nature and type of social superstructure. A radical change in the economic stricture of a given society produces change and radical transformation in the entire social superstructure. The relation between the base and the superstructure has a dialectical character. In the class society the base and superstructure have a class character. The antagonistic nature of the base in the social formation, such as slavery, feudalism and capitalism, is reflected as well in the superstructure itself. The process by which social ideas originate and develop in a historical epoch is a complex and often contradictory one. These ideas do not come into the world as an automatic reflection of the base, of economic realities. These ideas, social institutions are not created independent of economics but by the people in accordance with the existing social conditions. The change in the base and superstructure is only possible by the class struggle, when such conditions for change are ripe within the existing production relations. Key Words: Marxism, Base, Superstructure, Material conditions, Dialectics, Class struggle. 1. INTRODUCTION: The works those were regarded as great scholarship in nineteenth century Europe are German Ideology, British Economy and French Materialism. In this century German Philosophy was enriched with the help of Hegelian dialectic method and the materialism of Feuerbach. On the other hand British economy was developed by the enquiry of economic structure of a nation. Adam smith and David Ricardo proposed their value of labour theory that enriched British economy as capitalist system. And also we can see in this century the great development of socialistic theory in French socialism. These are all regarded as the source of Marxist theory. Marxism has its three parts –Marxist philosophy, Marxist economy and Marxist socialism. Dialectic materialism is understood as Marxist philosophy. The use of this dialectic materialism is for the enquiry of historical development of human civilisation and known as historical materialism also. So, Marxist philosophy is referred as dialectic and historical materialism. In Marxist theory, social structure consists of two parts – base and superstructure. Base and superstructure designate the social relations of a historically determined society as a total system in which material relations represent the real base or the foundation of society. On the other hand the political, religious, philosophical and ideological relations etc. represent the superstructure, which rise upon the given base and is determined by the base. 2. ECONOMIC UNDERSTANDING OF BASE AND SUPERSTRUCTURE: Marxist philosophy used dialectic materialism and historical materialism as a way of interpretation of human civilisation, what is known as materialistic interpretation of history or socio-economic interpretation of history. According to this theory, what happened in the society is created by materialistic or economic circumstances. What man has founded from the primitive age to till now, like religion, marriage system, art, culture, civilisation are all determined by the material or economic condition. For this reason Marx was of the opinion that economy is the base of all things. The economy of a given society determines its social, religious and cultural life. So we can say that civilisation of a particular stage entirely depend upon the economic condition or economic environment of that stage. For example, the economic environment of primitive age was based on slavery, that of feudalism in mediaeval age and of capitalism in the modern age. According to Marxist theory, in future a new economic condition will arise upon within the womb of modern capitalist society, which would replace the entire economic system of capitalism and establish a new economic system according to which the entire superstructure will be transformed into different shape [Joseph Stalin 1975; 25-39]. For Marx, the usage of social process of production determines the man’s relation and their right in society. The mode of production, the relations of production and the means of production – all these construct the economic Available online on WWW.IJIRMF.COM Page 225 – INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL FOR INNOVATIVE RESEARCH IN MULTIDISCIPLINARY FIELD ISSN – 2455-0620 Volume - 3, Issue - 8, Aug - 2017 structure of a society. This economic structure also transforms itself with the development of mode of production and as a result of it the social consciousness of man also changes. Through economy Marx gives a new interpretation about social system, known as economic interpretation of society. But here we have to be cautious that the term ‘economy’ does not only refer to currency, but also refers to the way in which man produce and uses things for their subsistence. According to Marx, whatever man produces for their subsistence within the sphere of social relation is collectively known as economy. From the primitive age man continuously wield over the nature and as a result of it new things are coming under the man’s utility and mode of production and its process. In the development of various social stages, according to the economic interpretation what we have understood is that, economy does not only determine the social mode of production but the social relation of production is also determined by it. In this way, the arrival of social relation of production from its particular economic system divides the social members into different classes. For example, in the economic system of husbandry, society divides its social members into slave and clan head and the agricultural society divides into landlord and serf and later it divided into many subsets. In the modern age, the capitalist economy divides the social members into two broad categories – bourgeoisie and proletariat. According to Marxism, how the social property will be distributed and who will accrue how much property – these are all determined by the economic system of that particular stage. Therefore it can be seen that only with the transformation in economic mode of production, the social system, social structure and social changes happen and they get into a new shape [Maurice Cornforth 1949; 34-47]. Here any one can ask there are so many factors are working in the society, but why Marx only concentrates on economy? However, it needs to be mentioned that “Marx never meant to claim an absolute validity for economic consideration to the exclusion of all other factors. It is not that the situation is the cause, in the sense of being only active agent while all phenomena are only a passive result. It is on the contrary a case of mutual action on the basis of economic necessity which, in the last instance, always works itself out”[Frederic Engels, Letters of Engels 1898; www.marxist.org].In this letter though Marx accept the other factors which mutually work together, but according to him, in the last economic necessity always work itself out. That is why Marx and Engels both believed that the economic factor is the base of all things. The base and superstructure has a class character in the class society because of the antagonistic nature of base in various social formations, such as feudalism, slavery and capitalism, and this antagonistic nature of base reflect itself within the superstructure. Moreover, the intellectual basis of state rule, the ideas justifying the use of state power and its distribution, are those of the ruling class ideas depend upon certain economical base. The intellectual social culture is merely a superstructure resting on the relation of production, on ownership of the means of production; in short socio-economic circumstances. The class as a social ideas arise out of dominant views and institutions of the society what is the product of a definite economic structure. These dominant views and institutions express the outlook and interest corresponding to the given economic structure and in the class society this outlook and interest is not more than that the outlook and interest of dominant, exploiting class. The class when it disconnect with the existing economic system being to take up the struggle against it and they immediately find themselves confronted with the whole sets of legal, political and social views and institutions which serve to protect the existing economic system and to suppress opposition to it. Therefore the history of class struggle proves that the dominant class establishes the legal, political and ideological superstructure of any society to fulfil the role of protecting and upholding the economic structure of that society and the interest of ruling class. The Marxist class struggle teach us not to respect the oppose views and institutions which serve the interest of dominant class against the subordinate class, but fight for new views and institutions which help to organise and inspire the broad alliance of all subordinate oppressed people and to break the opposed power and overcome the resistance of the oppressors and build a social society [Maurice Cornforth 2012; 218-228]. The process in which social ideas originate and developed is a complex an often contradictory one. These ideas, known as superstructure, do not come automatically into the world as the reflection of the base or economic realities.